Sunday, March 2, 2014

APPEALING THE APPEAL AND MISSING ZEROES

Today in the U Matuna, the newspaper for the Archdiocese of Agana, there was two-page centerfold ad for the Archdiocesan Annual Appeal. You'll have to find a copy to flesh out this story, but for now, here are our comments.
The "chapel" at Guam's "seminary"

Section 1 says "The estimated goals for the parish are recommendations." However, at a recent meeting between the Archbishop and the pastors on this matter, one priest asked the Archbishop if he should take out a loan if his parish couldn't meet the goal. He was only joking (sort of). But the archbishop replied "yes". And he wasn't joking. "Recommendation"? (Read more about that meeting here.)

In Section 2 there is a reference to the "percentage" that each parish is "assessed". NOW would have been the time to tell us what that percentage is. But you didn't. Hmmm. The section goes on to reference Canon Law and the Catechism and the requirement that we support our local church. Fine. But does that include our having to pay for all those trips the Archbishop takes with the newly ordained back to their homelands? I thought these were "missionaries". They left their homeland, right? And about those utilities at the Archbishop's private home in Mangilao. (Get to that later.)

The section goes on to tell us that Scripture speaks of tithing 10% (that should be a clue as to what is extorted from the parishes.). The 10% thing fits in well with Kikology but not so well with real Catholic teaching. The following is from Catholic.com

What is the Church's position on tithing?
Although the Church teaches that offering some form of material support to the Church is obligatory for all Catholic adults who are able to do so, it doesn't specify what percent of one's income should be given. Remember, tithing was an Old Testament obligation that was incumbent on the Jews under the Law of Moses. Christians are dispensed from the obligation of tithing ten percent of their incomes, but not from the obligation to help the Church.

The key to understanding how God wants us to give to the Church is found in 1 Corinthians 16:2, "On the first day of the week [Sunday] each of you should set aside whatever he can afford," and in 2 Corinthians 9:5-8,
So I thought it necessary to encourage the brothers to go on ahead to you and arrange in advance for your promised gift [donation], so that in this way it might be ready as a bountiful gift and not as an exaction. Consider this: Whoever sows sparingly will also reap sparingly, and whoever sows bountifully will also reap bountifully. Each must do as already determined without sadness or compulsion, for God loves a cheerful giver. Moreover, God is able to make every grace abundant for you, so that in all things, always having all you need, you may have an abundance for every good work.
To paraphrase: God doesn't demand a fixed amount of money from us; he wants us to give from the heart. If people are forced by their church to give a certain percent of their income, that's extortion. If they give freely and cheerfully the amount they are able, that's a gift.

And if this isn't good enough for you, search for the word "tithe" in the Catechism. It comes up only in one paragraph, in 2449, where it is lumped under: "all kinds of juridical measures", and we are made to know that the Old Covenant "tithe" no longer applies. 

So while the author of this AD takes pains to distinguish between the Appeal and the "assessment", we actually learn that the "assessment" is a fixed percentage, otherwise known as "extortion."

Section 3 speaks of "a goal amount established at the suggestion of the parish priests." Hmmm, according to all reports, the priests showed up at a meeting expecting to actually have this discussion and were simply handed a spreadsheet with the amounts they had to come up with. No suggestions. No discussion. One priest mumbled something about the Neo and walked out. Once the others learned there were to be no suggestions from the pastors, a motion was made to adjourn the meeting and the meeting was adjourned. 

Section 5 talks about two seminaries. Really? Okay, let's all do a field trip to the second seminary and see what's going on there. Ummmm, how about nothing. The lone seminarian is sent to the neo-seminary. He just doesn't have to sleep there. It says that both seminaries train men to be diocesan priests. Really? Then why the need for two seminaries?  But of course it's not true. And sadly, we are finding that out. RMS does NOT train men to be diocesans. It doesn't even train them to be missionaries. It trains them to be neos. 

Section 6 is interesting. It says that the archdiocese provides only 10% of the support for RMS and that the 10% for 2014 is approximately $98,000. Really? That means that in 2014 it will cost $980,000 to run RMS for one year. A million freaking dollars a year! Wow, imagine if the Archbishop was THAT committed to helping the rest of our schools raise that kind of money. Oh, but they're not neos. 

But we're not done with Section 6. So it's costing another $65,829 a year to take care of one guy in the "other" seminary, but you could actually send him off-island where he can get a real education for only $55,000, or even only $35,730 with a scholarship. Oh that's right. He's not a neo. And Aaron was willing to pay his own way???

Section 7 provides even more fun. It says: "The diocesan bishop is responsible for the proper formation of seminarians." Really? How's he gonna do that? We have a bishop who 1) does not accept the credentials of a Cardinal Prefect, 2) participates weekly in an illicit celebration of the eucharist, and 3) casually violates liturgical norms by inviting lay persons to give personal testimonies during Mass. We won't even get into: 1) illegally fired a pastor, 2) illegally tried to sign away church property, and 3) illegally fired en masse the diocesan finance council. And he's going to see to the proper formation of seminarians? 

Oh, and by the way, Diana, note where it says: "It is the responsibility of the bishop to determine if a seminarian is to be ordained a diocesan priest." You ridiculed Aaron for wanting to make sure he had other options for his future in the event he did not become a priest. You ridiculed him because he was not "all in", at least in your estimation. As you can see, Diana, becoming a priest is not his decision to make. But what do lawyers know about these things.

Section 7 tells us that it is "not necessary to send seminarians to another country or state for formation" because the "Archdiocese has at its means the necessary philosophical and theological faculties to provide the formation of seminarians." Really? Prove it. Show us the credentials. You want us to pay for it, show us what we're paying for. Before, when we paid for men to go to off-island seminaries, we could be certain that they were attending accredited institutions. We have no such certainty with this supposed local seminary. The bishop from the Lateran visited recently, publish his report. And by the way, what language do you teach in? These seminarians come from several different countries and speak several different languages. It's obvious to us that English is a major chore for most, and they're going to learn and understand the complex concepts in philosophy and theology?

Section 8 is a direct response to the comments on JungleWatch. Shame on you. You've disobeyed your catechist and have been "playing in the jungle."

Section 9 is, well, (smh)...still smh. (Clearing throat.) Section 9 says: "We think the people of the Archdiocese of Agana are really stupid." First of all, for the better part of a decade we were NOT told that RMS was for the sending of priests to the "ends of the earth". We were told it was a seminary for the Archdiocese of Agana, and our money was taken under that story. IT IS ONLY because of this blog that the Archdiocese was forced to tell the truth about RMS and why it now feels compelled to sell us a new story about another seminary. SMH!

The author of the AD quotes JPII's Redemptoris Missio as justification for the sudden aspiration to send RMS priests to "foreign lands". However, let's be honest. When the Church uses the words "mission territory", it probably doesn't mean the Archdiocese of San Francisco. Yet, according to the 2013 Archdiocesan Directory, we find Fr. John Wadeson, a priest incardinated in this archdiocese, living in San Francisco. And what's he doing there? Surprise, his address says: Neocatechumenal Center.
Now, I like Fr. John, so I don't want to pick on him, but what's he doing in the Archdiocese of San Francisco? Well, of course, he's spreading the Neocatechumenal Way, and so will all these other priests that we are paying for at RMS. They are not being sent to spread the Gospel of Jesus Christ and the truth of the Roman Catholic Church. They are being sent to spread the gospel according to Kiko and the false theology and illicit practices of the Neocatechumenal Way, AND AT OUR EXPENSE. 

We don't have to follow these priests around the world to know what they're doing. We only have to look at what the Neocatechumenal Way is doing right beneath our noses: waltzing into our churches, getting up right in the middle of our masses, and at the invitation of the Archbishop, telling us that we are dead Christians, telling us that they were just like us (suicidal, drunks, addicts, adulterers  - yah, just like us) until they were saved by the Kikocatechumenal Way.

Fine, it's a great story. But then do the hard work of going into the streets and finding the people who want to follow your Way. Stop using our pulpits and our Masses, which the Church forbids you to use anyway, despite the license taken by this particular bishop. 

That two page AD is a LIE from end to end, just like the LIE we have been sold for over a decade about RMS and the LIES we continue to be sold. But look, we'll drop the whole deal if you just do what the Pope asked you to do: conform your liturgy to the liturgical books. But of course you won't. So we are just going to have to withhold our money. And it looks like that for the last few years people have already started to do that, long before JungleWatch. 

By the way, interesting that they left the zeroes off the end:



49 comments:

  1. Guess the NEOS will be forking out a bit more. It is only fair that the families of those who have been ordained contribute the most. It will be showing an appreciation for what others have given to support the education of their children beginning with the 11 ordained at RMS!

    ReplyDelete
  2. Can this Bishop, canonically force the people of the diocese to support a lay organization that is separate from the church, that dictates what happens with this seminary, when JPII clearly stated that these seminaries must fall under jurisdiction of the local ordinary? And before the NCW hordes start shooting their arrows, be for real, the bishop does not control thr RMS.
    This organization seeks the destruction of this diocese as we know it.
    I wonder what the OFM's who have gone before think about this, tearing down and bashing all the hard work they put in to build the local church here on Guam. Shame on you bishop, for bashing the work of your brothers, whose initials of their order you still so fondly place after your name.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. He doesn't have to "force". He simply can do what he wants with the money because as he says, he is a "corporate sole and he can do anything he wants." That's not true, but unless we demand accountability he can and will do whatever he wants with the money, including supporting the NCW.

      Delete
  3. Unlike most of your writers I love the archbishop due to his many kindnesses to me (although I am NOT neo and he knows I hate the NCW). But I decided to follow the suggestion of one of the commenters on this blog and a week ago gave my parish a check made out to their GPA parish account for $400 in lieu of an AAA donation. I hope most of the money benefits the parish and not the AAA.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. That's a good and responsible idea. In general, it is time for our dioceses and parishes to be completely transparent with us about money. I believe that Pope Francis has already taken such steps in the Vatican. We will see if our dioceses and parishes follow.

      Delete
    2. We were being audited for 2011-2012 and met with third-party auditors to inform us of what financial records we needed to submit. I for one was glad about it because we were going to be schooled on transparency with expenitures, but all of a sudden it just all disappeared. We never turned in our documents or met with the auditors again. What happened?

      Delete
    3. The Archdiocese was indeed audited, and we were told there would be a meeting for all the clergy and office staff, mainly finance and secretaries, to discuss the findings of the audit, and what the parishes would need to do to make sure money is not being diverted. The meeting never happened. In fact, the findings of the audit were never revealed.

      Delete
  4. My wife and I have decided to donate our share of what we normally give to AAA to the religious sisters/the capuchin community who have instilled our lives with the Christian Faith, especially after reading Diana's comment. Our children have decided to donate on a yearly bases to the Catholic school of their choice.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Ideal opportunity now to not give any donations to the archbishops appeal this year. This action alone sends a clear message to him. Stop the money it is the best way.

    ReplyDelete
  6. What a beautiful chapel. Wow that put's me in awe..... Where can I go to see this? beautiful.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. If you look closely, the description under the picture indicates this is The "chapel" at Guam's "seminary"

      Delete
    2. Oh Mary Lou, this was meant as a scarsastic remark by a NEO!

      Delete
    3. Anonymous (March 3, 2014 at 9:48 PM): The remark by Anon @ 9:45 AM may have been meant as a sarcastic remark. However, someone who didn't notice the description under the photo DID wonder where the photo was taken and thought it was from off-island, never having been to the seminary.

      I thought there might have been others who wanted to know; hence my response.

      Delete
  7. I think that another reason for the downturns since the 2009 "high" of $131,175, besides the deliberate withholding of money by those "in the know," could be that others could not donate at the same levels as in years past. For example, upon retirement, people will need to make adjustments based on their fixed incomes.

    However, after following JungleWatch, I'm aware that a number of people have decided to re-route their donations to other recipients OR do as Anonymous (March 2, 2014 at 6:57 PM) did (i.e., change the payee to GPA to help pay the parish utility bill).

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Of course by 2009 we were beginning to experience what the "seminary" was producing (and this is not the fault of the seminarians.)

      Delete
  8. that AAA graph is really insulting. would one not notice the missing zeros? assume its just a smaller number?

    on another note, I thought I heard -from a KUAM segment - or read about the RMS seminary's annual Gala that they raise in that one event most of what they need to operate the seminary, something like $100K.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Anonymous (March 3, 2014 at 1:47 PM): Several people who gave a cursory glance at the graph DID NOT NOTICE the missing decimal point and zeros and thought “Chaplains” got most of the money. They only realized the characters were missing when they were asked to look more closely and then realized that “Seminary Subsidy” was getting the lion’s share.

      It appears to me that this was a deliberate attempt to “minimize” how much money was being earmarked for “Seminary Subsidy” based on:
      • The placement of that category at the bottom of the list;
      • The first number the eye sees is the number 1 while the first numbers in the other categories are 6 and 7; and
      • The decimal point and zeros, which had been included in the other three categories, were missing.

      It may have been an oversight. However, given the series of lies that have originated from the Chancery beginning with the July 16, 2013 removal of Fr. Paul Gofigan as Pastor of Santa Barbara Parish, I doubt it.

      Delete
    2. It's not just the missing two zeros and decimal point. Check the font size. It's smaller than the other numbers! 6 figures and a comma are the same size as 5 figures and a decimal point.

      Deception, pure and simple. Now, who's to blame?

      Delete
  9. There are many other ways to fulfill our duty and responsibility OF GIVING AND SUPPORTING OUR CATHOLIC CHURCH and are ASSURED THAT OUR MONIES ARE SUPPORTING AND CONTRIBUTING TOWARD THE CONTINUATION OF AUTHENTIC CATHOLICISM on Guam which has a long cultural history of its authenticity and ties to Rome and our Pope, and not to Kiko (the leader of the Neo Way). WE SHOULD NOT BE FORCED to support a questionable community/movement – known as “NCW” or the “Neocatechuminal Way”, or as “neos”-- which we do not trust, do not believe in, do not want to support and have any part of, nor want to give our money towards!

    Here are SOME WAYS you CAN CHOOSE TO GIVE and contribute to our Catholic Church on Guam. Be clear with your wishes or instructions to your parish THAT YOU WANT YOUR DONATION USED IN the PRECISE WAY YOU CHOOSE. For example: for utilities (power, water, phone, internet provider), trash collection, office supplies, yard maintenance, mailbox rental, Mass supplies like wine and host, etc, for Church flowers, Church cleaning and maintenance, parish CCD program, etc; OR GIVE directly to the Capuchin Friary and Seminary which accepts local sons and forms them in the Authentic Catholic Formation (notin the neo formation which the diocesan appeal goes towards), OR GIVE directly to a Catholic school you choose; OR GIVE directly to the Carmelites, Notre Dame or Mercy Nuns, OR WAIT until their Fundraisers comes around within the year then, GIVE DIRECTLY to Kusinan Kamalen Karidat or to Catholic Social Service.

    DON’T BE FOOLED, AGAIN, by this (AAA) ARCHDIOCESE ANNUAL APPEAL’s cunning and deceitful explanations and allow them to continue insulting our intelligence, Catholic Faithful! THIS APPEAL IS A NEO FUNDRAISER! That is plainly transparent!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. we even need to be careful about giving to Kamalin Karidat. The Deacon is known to give the Archbishop money from KK funds whenever he asks for it.

      Delete
    2. Deacon T. should then beware that doing so (giving toward the archbishop's support of the neos from monies donated specifically for the feeding of the poor) might and could not only be illegal, but cause a huge, financially hurtful drop in donations to Kamalen Karidat, as well!

      Delete
  10. Really nice chapel.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. so then why was the arch hitting up a certain large donor recently for 5 mil to build another one?

      Delete
    2. Maybe you could send the name of that donor to JungleWatch.info@gmail.com

      Delete
    3. Was this $5 million for the "Chapel of the Word" that somebody else mentioned in this blog? $5 million could pay for a building that this "parallel church" could use for events and liturgies for all of their members. No need for that temple-like Cathedral Basilica then.

      Delete
    4. Are we talking about the Boys' Chapel at FD? That has nothing to do with the Neo.

      Delete
    5. No. This is about the new Neo chapel at the Yona Seminary. The same lady who bought the arch his new car was gonna give the arch a cool 5 mil for the chapel, but....something happened.

      Delete
  11. Idolatry is found in the human heart as per Diana. Here are the seven points that she lists.

    In his book entitled Why Enough Is Never Enough: Overcoming Worries About Money - A Catholic Perspective, Gregory S. Jeffrey describes and outlines seven scenerios in which one places money first before God.


    1. When the person often suffers from a pervasive anxiety about their finances.
    2. When the person has a predisposition to compare his or her financial status with others.
    3. When the person has an unwillingness to recognize his or her good fortune.
    4. When the person displays greed.
    5. When the person is unable to conceive of something other than money motivating his or her job performance and life's decisions.
    6. When the person has a belief that, just for the money, we must do things we are not called to do.
    7. When the person feels discomfort when asked for alms or donations.
    It is interesting to note that in the Old Testament, a tenth of a person's income must be given to the temple tax, but in the New Testament, one finds that Jesus was not interested in the amount of money that was given for the temple tax. He was more interested in what is in the human heart.

    Well, Diana I see at least 3 points that apply to the Archbishop. The "giving" from the Chamorro people was never a problem at one point in time. The problem is when the "giving" only benefits a certain group which is the NCW.

    To pay for the education of 40 seminarians is sky high. The Archbishop is asking for an arm and a leg from not only the parishes, but the burden lies on the parishioners. The number of seminarians should be cut down!

    I feel that the Archbishop thinks this is a "rat race" so that he can say that Guam has the highest number of ordained priest per capita. It would make him look good for the red hat.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Janet B - MangilaoMarch 3, 2014 at 8:59 PM

      To Tony from a lot of really pissed of people of Guam:
      $1,000,000 per year to train these 40 or so priests, and only one really belongs to us...Junee Valencia? Some will go back to Samoa, Dallas, or elsewhere. All the Neo, most of whom come from outside our community (Guam, not Neo) will eventually be assigned by Kiko and Giuseppi to Africa/Asia. Wow, $1,000,000/year that could be used for schools, parish outreach, Catholic Social Services, and so much more. It could be used to reduce the parish cash drain so they would not have to charge for funerals and weddings. $1,000,000 per year so Kiko can have us fools on Guam train priests for his charism that insults the Church with lack of respect/obedience. All the while he gets super rich off all the merchandising he has going with communities not allowed to be truely Catholic. That is quite a story, but saddest of all is that it is reality. I will no longer fund the Yona seminary. If Kiko wants us to be a training ground then he will have to pay the price for formation for his legions. Wow, it just struck me...$1,000,000 per year for the last 12 years. We have been taken for a ride to the tune of $12,000,000, and now they want us to contribute more? Sorry Deacon Harold, Deacon Julius, Deacon Vincenzo, but you may have to call your families and tell them to pay for the final part of your formation. All the others living at RMS Yona, you should definitely call your families and communities back home and have them start passing the trash bag every time they gather. They will definately need to send gobs of money here to Guam because the people of Guam will no longer fund a foreign training facility that is unaccredited, and for the use of Kiko.
      Tony, I have resisted in sending comments for a while, thinking and praying that you might come to your senses. But your dog and pony paper this past weekend was just over the top. Instead of making things better, you seem to have a knack of making them profoundly worse. I hope your advice was way cheaper than your seminary.
      Good luck with the AAA, what little money you collect would be better spent sending real priests for badly needed training and advanced degrees so someone local will be able to fill your position when Rome has finally had enough. At least think of us in this little way by making succession plans now...and please don't include any current advisors in those plans...you do not want them to face a more arduous and painful conclusion to their ministries!

      Delete
    2. DianaMarch 3, 2014 at 5:17 PM
      Yes, it's always about the money. They are even questioning why the money is going to the Seminary. Perhaps, they don't realize that the Seminarians have to eat three times a day.

      Does Diana realize that our parishes will suffer in order for us to feed the seminary? Grow your own vegetable garden like the Carmelites! My main concern is keeping my parish doors from closing due to lack of funds. So Diana if you are so concerned about the seminarians starving by all means cook for them daily using your funds then you don't need to worry about them starving. I am sure each community on island can afford to do this daily on a monthly bases. The Lenten season is in and they can fast. Our Lord fasted for 40

      Delete
    3. I suppose Diana does not see that the AAA is asking for too much to educate the seminarians. It is always about the mission!

      Keep the mission comfortable while some of the parish church need repair. Let the parish suffer so long as the seminarians are able to live comfortably, eat good meals, get educated with local funds.

      She does not realize that many of the churches are in debt due to typhoon Ponsongwa and chata'an. Who helps the parishes pay down their bills? It certainly isn't AAA! It's the parishioners!

      Yes, Diana, where money is concerned, it is always about the mission and never the survival of the parish church. If a parish church is no longer able to finance itself, due to money going to the AAA for the mission, it will definitely close it doors!

      Delete
    4. This is exactly what they want. Kiko believes that the parish-based church is dead and that his community-model is the future. This is why everything is oriented to the deconstruction of the parish and the breaking of it into several communities. To understand this it is important to realize that neither Kiko nor Carmen are married and have families of their own, the first community. Neither do they belong to a religious community. Thus they fashion a church in their own image and create a community for their own need.

      Delete
    5. I couldn't agree more with your analysis Tim. And you're probably well aware that people in the communities are told that your "Christian" family is the community and if you're blood family doesn't support you then you cut them out. If you're friends aren't supportive of community you cut them out even if they are good and practicing Catholics. It's really quite, quite sad.

      Delete
    6. Amen to that! So,so,true for I am one of them!

      Delete
    7. You are all making an issue of MONEY. Stop and listen to yourselves. You are blaming the existence of an RMS for the neglect of the Parish Financial debts. The RMS, remains our diocesan seminary. You are the only ones creating separation, which is very sad. You do not understand the itinerary of the NCW and claim that their celebrations are a cause for division. You dont hear any members of the NCW stating they no longer belong to a parish. If you want to talk about division in this diocese, talk about those who cant even lay claim to an individual parish. You pick and choose what you want to attack the NCW of. Very few of you are even well versed in church doctrine, liturgical guidelines and so on. You have your own definition of a Christian Life or even Parish Life for that matter. I am not saying that what the Capuchins had taught us are wrong but you need to realize that their actions in how they handle the parish community is influenced by their formation and it is not the only formation that exists. I always wondered why my parish took so long to rebuild itself(the church building). I realized it was the Capuchin way of life. Money was not made of an issue. The vow of poverty sort of forced the priest to make due with what already existed, even if it meant patching an already termite infested panel with another on top of another. You want priests who have attended academic institutions where they can receive degrees in psychology and business. I dont need to say more on that, it speaks for itself. Nonetheless, you are saying instead of priests trained in theology, sacred scriptures and other things pertaining to a spiritual life, you would prefer a psychologist or even a business professional. On another note,If you arent aware already, in every church it is highly recommended that the Holy Eucharist be reserved in a chapel suitable for private adoration and prayer. If this is impossible because of the structure of the church or local custom, it should be kept on an altar or some other place in the church that is prominent and properly decorated.(taken from the GIRM) So to say that if there is no tabernacle present on the main floor, it isnt catholic, this is just wrong. You fail to realize that it is even more beautiful to know that there is Chapel Dedicated to the Word and another Chapel dedicated to the Eucharist. Ive never been taught by my catechists that all those outside the community are evil. You who continue to speak of none sense give me reason to believe there is this evil that exists. I hate to come to that point ever. I do realize though that many of you just dont understand. Again, it will be sayed, "give us the documents and we will back down", but the way in which you all are acting says, that since you havnt presented the documents that allow you to receive communion in that manner then we will continue to be very unchristian to you and we will no longer refer to the Archbishop by his title and all you neos are minions of his. Just a sad day for this church.

      By the way a little history of my formation...
      Capuchin Baptized
      Capuchin Reconciliation, Holy Communion and Confirmation
      Diocesan Renewed and Enriched
      and since you all claim a difference in the two...
      Diocesan Neo Experiencing a long Walk in The Way.
      Peace!

      Delete
    8. Yes. A sad day for the church. Show us the document.

      Delete
    9. Anon@ March 5, 2014 at 12:13 AM

      Please don't be dismissive of the countless number of former neo followers who have testified on this blog. Not just on Guam, but all over the world.

      The sticking point on this island is that our Archbishop is personally embedded and thus can no longer be objective to these concerns.

      It is not just about the money. It may be the issue on hand on this post, but if you have been paying attention for a little more than half a year on this blog, you would have seen that money is just one of many concerns.

      Further, this is not about pitting one order against another, one movement against another. It's about the real and documented experiences of how the Neo have separated their members from the Church through liturgical liberties, manipulation of the human spirit, and aggressive strong arm tactics here on Guam. Even Pope Francis recognized that this is occurring worldwide, and in line with how charitable he is, admonished your leadership early this year in his last audience with them!

      No matter how you try to compare it, the elephant in the room is that our Archbishop cannot act upon ANY concerns towards the neo because of his intimate involvement and refusal to view his duties as our Shepard sans the lens of the Neo leadership.

      It is great for whatever positive results you have obtained from walking the way, however, if there are elements that separate you from the Church, recognize them and correct them! Don't be so defensive! This is not about kicking you or anyone out of the Church. If that were so, nobody would take the time to point out the specifics! It would be an across the board dismissal! Pope Emeritus Benedict did a great job trying to reign it in. In words, your leadership seemingly agreed, but in actions, they continue to thumb their noses at the statutes. (With our Archbishop, it was with WORDS and ACTIONS!)

      Correct the incongruence. Be objective and research what is being said ABSENT the influence of the opinion of your "responsible," "catechist," or whomever is subjective to the Neo. Read the CCC, and other documents pertaining to your new statutes. Do not try to bend, rationalize or manipulate the CCC or other documents to your practices.

      Ask yourself why you celebrate the Eucharist separated from our Sundays. The new statutes instructed you to adhere to this; reflect on why this obligation, which is already recognized in the regular Church, had to be emphasized to the Neo.

      Recognize that you are being sold a bill of goods in relation to "early Christian liturgy." Recognize that there is absolutely no documentation to support this as authentic beyond anything Kiko has written.

      If returning to the Church is the goal, why create liturgy that is not recognizable to the Church nor has ever been in practice before Kiko and Carmen created the Neo?

      Ask yourself why Kiko and the other neo leaders remain obstinate towards the liturgies of the One Church?

      These questions are real inquiries that are not from mere opinion, but from understanding the liturgies of our Church.

      Correcting these concerns SHOULD allow you to continue in the WAY with congruence to the Church as the Church instructs.

      Delete
  12. Well said. Janet. Archbishop Apuron has made the people of Guam look like fools. Twelve million USD which could have been invested to secure the future of the archdiocese.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Anyone notice that our seminary has no kneelers, no tabernacle, no altar, nothing really to show it's forming Catholic priests? This is the same set up in almost all other seminaries run by the Way. What kind of priests are we forming in these chapels?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The kind of Priest are willing to go on a mission rather a medicre type of priest.

      The Old man from Santa Rita Semper Fediles.

      Delete
    2. Yes, I've noticed that as well -- the common use of folding chairs in the rooms where neo-refashioned Mass takes place. I also noticed that same "signature" style of acrylic-looking folding chairs with no kneelers in that video and site where the neo architect for Santa Rita's (new Church?) displays his scrapbook of examples of his architectural feats. All those rooms have folding chairs and no kneelers! If this same architect is designing Santa Rita Church then parishioners can kiss kneelers goodby. I do hope I am wrong on this.

      However, considering the neo's lack of holy reverence and regard in the distribution and reception of the Real Presence of Our Lord God in Holy Communion, why would they then, need kneelers?

      Delete
    3. My poor old man. Now you have crossed the Rubicon. The diocesan priests are "mediocre" (right spelling).
      You must be watching too many B rated movies.....
      Fact: the curriculum that most Diocesan priests on Guam and else
      where is far superior to the excuse of an education received at RMS.
      Fact: It is because our Archbishop is himself quite mediocre that he and his minions (recruited for their carpet qualities) could not bear to have a Priest like Father Paul stand near him, in a constant reminder of how dull they appear in contrast.

      Your fantasies, your hatred, are a stark reminder of the reason we must fight evil person like you.
      Pax Christum

      Delete
    4. Dear Old Man if you really think that priests that aren't willing to go on mission are mediocre compared to those that are willing then you have a warped vision of the Church. Also if all the priests were to go on mission who would be here to preside over your Eucharist? Are you calling your presbyters that stay on Guam mediocre? And please brother stop playing in the Jungle because you are just making your fellow Neocats look crazy when I know many who are fine and great people.

      To Maria: Kiko and his followers call this a "new aesthetic" of the Church. They say it's much more beautiful compared to every other church especially the ones with altars. "Why the need for altars when this is a banquet?" they say. And you are right the Way doesn't have kneelers because we never ever kneel in Eucharist. And if we're forming priests that don't kneel before God then what will that do to all of us being cared for by them?

      Frenchie: Thank you for calling this man out. The constant name calling this "old man" is doing is getting out of hand and making the Neocats look worse and worse everyday.

      Delete
    5. Hey "old man". "mediocre"? try this on for size.
      In a certain parish where the pastor was an RMS trained priest there was a catholic who died. Now this person wasn't a very devout catholic, nonetheless, had been baptized in the church.
      The family was refused to have a funeral mass at this parish because of the way this person supposedly lived, Obviously upset, the family went to another parish (OFM) run who granted them to have a funeral mass. This RMS trained priest then went to con celebrate at this funeral mass! (I won't use the word that I want to here!)
      point 1. Every person Baptized catholic has a right to a Christian burial. Check the Catholic Documents (CCC, Canon law)
      Point 2. What a lack of compassion towards the grieving family! A total lack of pastoral concern for the flock. Tell me again? mediocre? who?

      Delete
    6. Yes. That episode was pretty da*n exemplary of the quality of priests produced by RMS. The "pastor" forbids a funeral at his own church and then shows up to CONCELEBRATE the funeral Mass at the other church to which the family was forced to go. We're beyond just bad formation here. We are talking about an intelligence quotient.

      Delete
  14. @ Maria you notice the beauty of the chair also? You got a nice eye. Where can I go to check this place out. You guys wanna meet and check this place out?

    Bubba from Umatac

    ReplyDelete
  15. AnonymousMarch 5, 2014 at 12:13 AM I like the Capuchin Priest I'm in the way, so am I a bad person who seperate myself from all of you? I think not.

    Boy from Sinajana

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Well, you said it yourself. You "separate" yourself. We know that.

      Delete
  16. We are not the only ones that have concerns about AAA.

    Newark Archbishop's pricey retirement home spurs backlash - NJ.com
    www.nj.com/.../archbishops_pricey_retirement_home_spurs_backlash_as_...
    Mar 2, 2014 - Every year, without fail, Joe Ferri writes a $100 check to the Archdiocese of Newark for the Archbishop's Annual Appeal, a fundraising drive that ...

    ReplyDelete